|
|
Quote: |
NEW YORK GIANTS — RANK: 9TH After spending a ton last offseason on wide receiver Kenny Golladay and cornerback Adoree’ Jackson, among others, the Giants’ new brass went the opposite direction heading into 2022, most notably releasing cornerback James Bradberry after a lengthy attempt to find a trade partner. The old regime left some gifts behind as well though, with the 2022 first-round pick they acquired from the Bears turning into No. 7 overall pick tackle Evan Neal. Pairing Edge defender Kayvon Thibodeaux to go with Neal is the type of first-round haul that can legitimately change the course of a franchise in one offseason. The Giants have the most active draft capital in the NFL and the second-most effective cap space from 2022-2024 — that’s how a franchise turns things around in a hurry after five awful seasons. |
What does the Giants’ salary-cap situation look like in 2023 and beyond? - ( New Window )
From the article:
We converted every rookie-contract player currently on each team’s roster into their Fitzgerald-Spielberger value in the same manner Timo Riske analyzed each team’s 2021 Draft capital to weight the value of each player. For example, No. 1 overall pick Jacksonville Jaguars edge defender Travon Walker would be worth 3,000 points on this scale. The Jaguars have the third-largest draft capital investment on their roster currently, trailing the New York teams in the Giants and Jets.
This aims to capture both the value of players that have not played an NFL snap yet, like Walker, as well as each team's total potential for surplus value from rookie contracts. The NFL rookie wage scale made draft picks more valuable than ever before because not only are you adding quality young talent, but you also realize significant savings as compared to the veteran player market. Thus, there is a clear connection to forward-looking cap space here.
But with a new front office and brand new coaching staff, no long term contracts hurting the franchise, things are looking up.
But with a new front office and brand new coaching staff, no long term contracts hurting the franchise, things are looking up.
There are a few long-term contracts on this team that is preventing the GM and HC having total flexibility.
Personally feel Leo can be extended but I gotta imagine he's wanting that guaranteed money.
I never saw a bad OL that fielded two good tackles. It just doesn't happen. Get these kids going and we'd be set along the OL. Two cost controlled (Thomas for 2-3 more years) tanks up front...
Thibs and Thomas/Neal. Deliver us from NFL relegation/purgatory.
D we need Thibs and Ojulari to lock down the edges along with maybe some sizzle from last year's holdovers (name escapes me) and McKinney/Love in the backend. Maybe the younger corners emerge...
Kids need to turn into men. Can we have one huge developmental year here that we see so many of the well run teams enjoy time and time again? Just one time.
That's right...Schoen will need some prudent restraint on acquisitions/extensions and not just because he has the cap space. Look towards efforts that are continual, long-lasting improvements in the roster versus quick fixes. His predecessor had no feeling for this concept whatsoever in all those desperate moves over past 4 years.
In fact, once we get out of cap hell then using that free space should somehwat mirror the likely rebuild timing. And keep in mind another rookie QB contract will likely be coming on board next year so don't just overlever everything else because of that (like you know who)...
we will be in the same exact spot for the next half decade too.
DG haters actually don't need to make anything up.
I used to get a lot of posts like these from some of the other guys in his fan club. Were you a charter member?
Teams are in 1/3 phases -- building up, in their window, or winding down.
Each player is a cost/benefit ratio. When you add the costs up, you hit the cap. When you add the benefits up, you either have enough to be good or not.
Too many fans view it as see! the team did things, they're fine. That's naive. The goal isn't activity. It's to have the resources required to match where you are in your cycle.
When you're on your way up, you're roughly hoping you have a bunch of player where the cost/benefit ratio will improve over time (meaning a guys will outplay their contract soon).
When you're in your window the ratio for a bunch of players is 1:1 -- (meaning the resources you spent were spot on).
When you're winding down, you accept to be under water (maybe guys are older, there's a lot of dead money etc.)
Cap hell is not the inability to do things. There are always tools to make moves.
Cap hell is having a bunch of bad cost/benefit ratio players.
When Gettleman dismissed the question about being in a window, I wanted to ring his neck through the screen. (BTW there is some video from Abrams talking about 3-year horizons).
It's crystal clear to me the Giants were building for a 21/22/23 window.
Abrams basically said as much, when he was asked why the Giants leaned into spending in 2021, even though the cap was down from the Covid year.
Schoen simply didn't agree, and he got a jumpstart on winding down.
Giants haven't had the "problem" of having good young players to worry about signing for 10+ years.
Quote:
Was an outlier. The team has been awful for a decade.
But with a new front office and brand new coaching staff, no long term contracts hurting the franchise, things are looking up.
There are a few long-term contracts on this team that is preventing the GM and HC having total flexibility.
We are in trouble, I think, if Jones fails. If he succeeds we can tag him and see how he does for a second solid season.
We are in touble if Galloday and Williams are quite average though both can be cut after the season but with ramifications.
I see Schoen being a "I don't care...you don't fit...bye" type of guy.
Giants haven't had the "problem" of having good young players to worry about signing for 10+ years.
not too savvy...
Quote:
Great post, many thanks.
When Gettleman dismissed the question about being in a window, I wanted to ring his neck through the screen. (BTW there is some video from Abrams talking about 3-year horizons).
It's crystal clear to me the Giants were building for a 21/22/23 window.
Abrams basically said as much, when he was asked why the Giants leaned into spending in 2021, even though the cap was down from the Covid year.
Schoen simply didn't agree, and he got a jumpstart on winding down.
Funny, DG sounded alot like fans here who don't think cap hell was present.
the longer that lasts -- the longer you are in cap hell
this year we started looking at the new NFL season with a negative cap number -- in other words we had to cut players just to get under the cap --
That's the definition of cap hell
Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on your viewpoint) we sucked, so cutting players barely made a difference to how bad we are/were.
After all the cuts to get us under the cap James Bradberry had to be cut just to make room for us to sign our 2022 draft class.
Pretty much every player the Giants signed had to be signed for vet minimum -- they does not give you a lot of flexibility to sign talent to bolster the team
Like it or not Gettleman created that situation with questionable signings. He did not manage the current cap very well and kept pushing the envelope of the current cap - pushing it into the next cap. Using that practice it was just a question of time before the can would have been kicked further.
I do give Shoen credit -- he did cut a lot of that crap out and appears to be a much more disciplined GM when it comes to the cap.
This is a good thing. Now let's see what he does with it
The Bills and the Rams will go into next year tight against the cap, but that’s fine.
They’re square in their window, and they have a bunch of guys at the right cost/benefit ratio.
1. extend players coming off rookie deals to 2nd contracts
2. spend (overspend) on free agents
not having any players worthy of extending, the odds are the only "punishment" from cap hell this offseason was saving the nyg future dead money from overpaid UFAs they didn't sign and gaining extra comp picks they didn't offset. and i'd argue that strategy was (correctly) more by choice than forced.
fact that may surprise people - the year 1 cap hits they gave Feliciano (2.98m), Tyrod (2.7m), and Glowinski (3.3m) combined were actually big enough to have afforded the year 1 cap hit of any big $ multiyear signing this offseason - including the very highly paid JC Jackson (8m), Von Miller (5m) or Terron Armstead (3.9m). so deals on that scale were possible they just made an active choice not to do them. cap hell didn't stop them this year and they may make a similar choice next year even if they have room because like schoen himself said teams rarely get good roi with top shelf UFAs. schoen inherited a team with 99 problems but the cap aint one. if he had $20m extra this offseason im really not sure much would have gone differently.
He gets to assemble a team with lots of options at his disposal.
Good players cost money, whether they are UFAs, trades, or retention.
Good players cost money, whether they are UFAs, trades, or retention.
sure but that doesn't change the fact that they could have afforded the cost of just about any "good player" they wanted if they thought the player was worth it.
The 2022 NY Giants aren’t a player (non elite QB) away from winning anything substantial. Investments are better made at this stage in young developing players with some promise versus overpaying guys that have reached their ceiling. The latter will just leave this team overpromising and underperforming.
Understanding the cap doesn’t mean you understand player evaluation...
Teams are in 1/3 phases -- building up, in their window, or winding down.
Each player is a cost/benefit ratio. When you add the costs up, you hit the cap. When you add the benefits up, you either have enough to be good or not.
Too many fans view it as see! the team did things, they're fine. That's naive. The goal isn't activity. It's to have the resources required to match where you are in your cycle.
When you're on your way up, you're roughly hoping you have a bunch of player where the cost/benefit ratio will improve over time (meaning a guys will outplay their contract soon).
When you're in your window the ratio for a bunch of players is 1:1 -- (meaning the resources you spent were spot on).
When you're winding down, you accept to be under water (maybe guys are older, there's a lot of dead money etc.)
Cap hell is not the inability to do things. There are always tools to make moves.
Cap hell is having a bunch of bad cost/benefit ratio players.
Precisely christian. Well said.
The 2022 NY Giants aren’t a player (non elite QB) away from winning anything substantial. Investments are better made at this stage in young developing players with some promise versus overpaying guys that have reached their ceiling. The latter will just leave this team overpromising and underperforming.
Understanding the cap doesn’t mean you understand player evaluation...
apparently understanding how to register for multiple handles doesn't mean you understand how to post...
Quote:
that is worth it doesn’t mean it is actually worth it from a team building perspective.
The 2022 NY Giants aren’t a player (non elite QB) away from winning anything substantial. Investments are better made at this stage in young developing players with some promise versus overpaying guys that have reached their ceiling. The latter will just leave this team overpromising and underperforming.
Understanding the cap doesn’t mean you understand player evaluation...
apparently understanding how to register for multiple handles doesn't mean you understand how to post...
Only have and need one, despite you continuing to reach with that one.
And don't be so irritable, it's not like the Giants lost their ability to franchise tag all their valuable players going forward...
Exactly. This is why you can't measure cap health by activity and not always dollars under the cap.
A great example is the Bills. They'll go into next year slightly over the cap, but they'll be fine. Their roster is full of good players at the right cost.
What Schoen is striving for is financial neutrality. He's winding down the Gettleman hypothesis, and creating a blank slate to build out his.
Of course that is not likely going to happen...
Quote:
that is worth it doesn’t mean it is actually worth it from a team building perspective.
Exactly. This is why you can't measure cap health by activity and not always dollars under the cap.
A great example is the Bills. They'll go into next year slightly over the cap, but they'll be fine. Their roster is full of good players at the right cost.
What Schoen is striving for is financial neutrality. He's winding down the Gettleman hypothesis, and creating a blank slate to build out his.
Yeah, I get your analogy.
I, and maybe a few others on here, would have probably liked to see Schoen do a little more turnover of some guys with waning value, but I get it. Rookie GM not trying to walk in like a bull in a china shop, and giving a few guys who work hard a chance to turn it around, or probably moreso let them hang themselves if he did an adequate player evaluation during the offseason.
Giants can have some successes this year without having a successful year on the field...
Quote:
that is worth it doesn’t mean it is actually worth it from a team building perspective.
Exactly. This is why you can't measure cap health by activity and not always dollars under the cap.
A great example is the Bills. They'll go into next year slightly over the cap, but they'll be fine. Their roster is full of good players at the right cost.
What Schoen is striving for is financial neutrality. He's winding down the Gettleman hypothesis, and creating a blank slate to build out his.
so call it roster hell. or bad organization for a decade hell. that's the problem driving Schoen's decision making far moreso than the cap. Acting like the cap was a significant obstacle is a pre-excuse that supposes he has no agency in making decisions when he did in fact have choices. it's the tail wagging the dog.
and to be clear I've made no argument against the path he took, i was advocating almost this exact path pre-FA, but that doesn't mean there weren't other paths possible. now that we know the exact cap numbers it's inarguable that they could have accommodated the cap # of literally any player transacted in lieu of choosing some combination of Taylor/Feliciano/Glowinski.
Because that's what very well those 3 guys will be doing by possibly October...
Because that's what very well those 3 guys will be doing by possibly October...
they drafted Ezeudu pretty high for an interior OL that's probably going to end up starting the year on the bench.
they could have used that same pick for any QB in the draft other than Pickett.
they could have traded Barkley or Jones to create more room to do all of the above and then brought in any other players they chose.
they made their choices and publicly acknowledged consideration of the alternatives mentioned above - while also commenting that spending on bigger ticket FA's rarely work out. they made the decisions they made for very justifiable non-cap reasons which they've explained in interviews. grading them against a curve of "cap hell" is missing the point on the path they chose.
and to be clear I've made no argument against the path he took, i was advocating almost this exact path pre-FA, but that doesn't mean there weren't other paths possible ...
1) That's literally the point everyone is making. We are all agreeing with you.
2) No one is saying there weren't. We are all agreeing with you.
Maybe you define cap hell as something else, but the point I made -- based on the pros and experts I've listened to -- cap hell is being upside down on the cost/benefit ratio of your roster.
Not how many dollars you have free, and not whether you can afford a single expensive player.
Trading Jones and/or Barkley could have helped free up some space and you wouldn't get any argument out of me to do it. But obviously they chose to give them another chance and/or the offers were bad or non-existent.
Besides they could kill it this year and we would be short a much-needed franchise tag to keep them both. :-)
Quote:
so call it roster hell. or bad organization for a decade hell ...
and to be clear I've made no argument against the path he took, i was advocating almost this exact path pre-FA, but that doesn't mean there weren't other paths possible ...
1) That's literally the point everyone is making. We are all agreeing with you.
2) No one is saying there weren't. We are all agreeing with you.
Maybe you define cap hell as something else, but the point I made -- based on the pros and experts I've listened to -- cap hell is being upside down on the cost/benefit ratio of your roster.
Not how many dollars you have free, and not whether you can afford a single expensive player.
sorry but whether or not you can afford to do things is pretty foundational to the function of any cap.
if you can afford to do expensive things you aren't in "hell", that's when you can't afford to do things. just as it routinely happens in the nba or nhl, there are times when teams simply can't afford to make certain moves because of the cap. that's not what happened here.
if you can afford to do expensive things you aren't in "hell", that's when you can't afford to do things …
1) Not always, and that’s my point you are missing. If a team can’t afford to do much because they have a roster full of good, well paid players, that’s not hell, that’s success (example being the Bills).
2) I was responding to your example, where the Giants could have afforded one premium player, if they had pooled the money they used to moderately upgrade a few positions. That’s not a compelling example of “expensive things” that’s an “expensive thing.”
sorry but whether or not you can afford to do things is pretty foundational to the function of any cap.
if you can afford to do expensive things you aren't in "hell", that's when you can't afford to do things. just as it routinely happens in the nba or nhl, there are times when teams simply can't afford to make certain moves because of the cap. that's not what happened here.
The signed a journeyman middling QB, a couple of average interior lineman of which one is a project converting to Center. In order to do those pedestrian moves and sign their draft class, it still required them to shed their starting CB Bradberry. Otherwise, they are restructuring more contracts.
You don't think that is hell?
with the combined cap hits they gave just Glowinski and Tyrod they could have afforded Tyreek Hill's 6.4m cap hit and still signed feliciano - and hill's 30m AAV was the highest given to any non-QB this offseason. include Slayton or Barkley in that deal and you can still bring in Tyrod, Glowinski, or both.
i obviously dont think that would have been the right move because this franchise shouldn't be giving up top 10 draft picks under any circumstance but it shows there was a pretty wide range of players they could have added if they wanted to.
Surprise me...
Surprise me...
if that's all it takes to get you to stop responding to my posts you should have said so years ago.
Quote:
aren’t helping your cause here. When I read a good point on this, I will respond.
Surprise me...
if that's all it takes to get you to stop responding to my posts you should have said so years ago.
Don’t be sore. You can make decent cases if you stay away from signing and extending everyone,,,